An image of the Utah state flag and the American Flag generated by Google Gemini.
THE TRIAL OF TYLER ROBINSON—TWO SOVEREIGNS OR ONE? KEEP IT SIMPLE
INTRODUCTION
The violent and senseless killing of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, on September 10th, 2025, was a political assassination that will have a generational impact on the millions of Americans and, indeed, many around the world who followed his message of faith, family, and nation. In the immediate fog of the killing, two suspects were detained in what can only be termed an amateur hour moment for local law enforcement as well as Kirk’s “security team.” While the FBI Director Kash Patel posted that the suspect was in custody on X, the actual criminal agent was heading home in his Dodge Challenger after evading detection. He leaped from his perch on the Losee Center, a vulnerable roof location only 150-200 yards away from where Charlie Kirk was seated on his immensely successful “Prove me Wrong—America’s Comeback” tour, and made his way through a wooded area, dumping the rifle and apparently jumping into his vehicle and driving over 250 miles to his home in Washington County, well to the southwest of the crime scene. It appears that a combination of Ring doorbell cameras and enhanced security video from the campus combined to provide strong information to both federal and state agents as well as the public. The rifle, a 30-06 caliber Mauser apparently bedded in a MacMillan or other synthetic aftermarket stock, was topped with a variable scope. The video apparently confirms that, in pieces, the rifle was smuggled to the roof perch and then taken down after the murder. Such rifles are pillar bedded, and the action can be removed from the stock. This is still a lot of hardware to secret considering the scope, but it appears in a grainier escape video that the pieces were hastily stashed in his backpack during the escape.
On the evening of September 11th or early in the morning of September 12th, Tyler Robinson was taken into custody in Washington County, Utah, by state and federal agents after his family turned him in. Notwithstanding the immense physical and visual evidence obtained, which likely would have led to his eventual arrest, Robinson was apprehended through the actions of his family, which, ironically, had ties to law enforcement, including the U.S. Marshal’s Service and the local Washington County, Utah, Sheriff’s Office. A confident and professional public statement by Utah Governor Spencer Cox had “we got him” as his opening. President Trump had announced an apprehension with a “high degree of certainty” hours before on Fox and Friends, and we broke it on 850 WTAR moments later. Utah’s Governor stated flatly that charges would be forthcoming by Tuesday and that the death penalty was alive and well in Utah. The FBI has substantial visibility in this matter, as the forensics went directly to the national lab in Quantico, Virginia, but it was clear from the tone and optics of the press conferences, dominated by Governor Cox and his Commissioner of Public Safety, that Utah has the greater public interest in this prosecution. A law-abiding state largely controlled by those of the Mormon faith in policymaking positions, the violence and optics of this horrific crime are both the source of outrage and, yes, embarrassment in Utah. A twisted leftist radical enmeshed in a relationship with a transsexual amid changing his biological sex from man to woman, Tyler Robinson is the face of a radical and violent extreme left. Charlie Kirk offered words and thoughts; Robinson and his miscreant allies, cheering from near and far, offered bullets. It will end. What now? Read on.
THE DEATH PENALTY HAS WITHIN IT A GOAL OF RETRIBUTION, BUT FOR A TIME THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT HAD THE STATES SCRAMBLING TO REVISE THEIR SENTENCING CRITERIA WHEN IT DECLARED THE PUNISHMENT GENERALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
In Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 92 S.Ct. 2726, 33 L.Ed.2d 346 (1972), the United States Supreme Court struck down the death penalty as it then existed in the states, referring frequently to the evils of unlimited sentencing discretion. Justice White, for example, said that the current death penalty practice used “no meaningful basis for distinguishing the few cases in which it is imposed from the many cases in which it is not.” Four years later, the Court issued a series of death penalty cases interpreting Furman and amplifying its analysis. In Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153, 188, 96 S.Ct. 2909, 2932, 49 L.Ed.2d 859 (1976), a plurality of the Court interpreted Furman as mandating that “where discretion is afforded a sentencing body on a matter so grave as the determination of whether a human life should be taken or spared, that discretion must be suitably directed and limited so as to minimize the risk of wholly arbitrary and capricious action.”
Justice White commented in Gregg on the function of the statutory aggravating factors enacted by the Georgia legislature after Furman:
“The Georgia Legislature has plainly made an effort to guide the jury in the exercise of its discretion, while at the same time permitting the jury to dispense mercy on the basis of factors too intangible to write into a statute…. As the types of murders for which the death penalty may be imposed become more narrowly defined and are limited to those which are particularly serious or for which the death penalty is peculiarly appropriate as they are in Georgia by reason of the aggravating-circumstance requirement, it becomes reasonable to expect that juries — even given discretion not to impose the death penalty — will impose the death penalty in a substantial portion of the cases so defined. If they do, it can no longer be said that the penalty is being imposed wantonly or freakishly or so infrequently that it loses its usefulness as a sentencing device.”
In the immediate aftermath of the Furman decision, states, including Utah, immediately established certain aggravating factors that a sentencing judge or jury could use as a guidepost for the imposition of that penalty in only a certain classification of cases and crime factors. In all other scenarios, life would be the maximum penalty. The following is a breakdown of what Utah will charge and prove to seek the death penalty. First, the basic murder provision, which appears below:
“Utah State Code Section 76-5-203—Murder
(2) An actor commits murder if:
(a) the actor intentionally or knowingly causes the death of another individual;”
The forensic and developing eyewitness and visual forensics, as well as the technical forensics such as prints, contact DNA, and similar physical evidence, will create a compelling case against Robinson. So far, no corroborating confession has been obtained from him, but none is needed. His confession to his family will be admissible, but the details are not public as of this writing. His roommate is cooperating with state and federal investigators, but I smell a rat, and his denial of knowledge of anything occurring or planned strains credulity. We will see. In response to the Furman case and others, the Utah legislature enacted the following “Aggravated Murder” statute to provide guidelines for the imposition of the death penalty under the following circumstances, which I deem the most provable in this disgusting crime:
“Utah State Code Section 76-5-202—Aggravated murder
2) (a) An actor commits aggravated murder if the actor intentionally or knowingly causes the death of another individual under any of the following circumstances:
(iii) the actor knowingly created a great risk of death to another individual other than the deceased individual and the actor;
(xviii) the actor committed homicide in an especially heinous, atrocious, cruel, or exceptionally depraved manner, any of which must be demonstrated by physical torture, serious physical abuse, or serious bodily injury of the deceased individual before death;
(3) (a) If a notice of intent to seek the death penalty has been filed, a violation of Subsection (2) is a capital felony”
In my opinion, both factors will be utilized by the state prosecuting team. Here is why:
- Robinson took a shot over a crowd and under circumstances where those who were not his intended target could be harmed or killed. Remember Butler, when the miscreant Crooks killed one person and maimed another in his zeal to assassinate Trump—the same could have occurred here in the stress and sick urgency of the moment.
- Ballistics will be front and center in this case. This was not the .30-06 round that the Greatest Generation took to war in their M-1 Garands. The modern loads most probably used by Robinson range from 165 to 180 grains and are driven by modern propellants. The velocities are from 2700 fps to well over 3000 fps. These rounds are designed to drop 1000-pound Elk and Moose. The bullet hit Kirk with little loss in velocity given the downhill path it took and the short range to target. The wound inflicted on Charlie Kirk was grievous, and he bled to death between the stage and the vehicle he was rushed to the hospital in. This was a depraved use of this rifle and inflicted a fatal and serious wound calculated to violently and publicly kill. The intention was to hit him in the head, and the disgusting results are preserved for posterity. I hope that someday Kirk’s children are protected from seeing it—the second criterion is met, and I believe the state will pursue this aggravating factor as well. The FBI will provide the compelling forensic background.
The Utah statute provides a sixty (60) day window for the prosecution to file an intent to seek the death penalty. I suspect this will be attached to the charging instruments early in the week of September 15th.
WILL THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INITIATE A PARALLEL PROSECUTION? PROOF ISSUES WEIGH AGAINST IT WHEN UTAH CAN CONVICT AND LIKELY EXECUTE MUCH MORE EXPEDIOUSLY
In the interest of federalism and comity, states have the primary right and responsibility to see to public safety within their borders. It is very clear here that Utah has every intention to fully pursue Robinson to the limits of the law. Federal criminal prosecutions which lack a distinct federal nexus, such as the violation of a specific federal statute or a crime occurring in the maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, are not legally permissible. The violation of a federal hate crime law might fit, but the motivation and intent are murky. The following will be considered by the Attorney General, who will probably be under pressure to indict:
“18 U.S. Code § 249 – Hate crimes
(a) In General.—
(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—
(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—
(i) death results from the offense”
There is no death sentence authorized here even if the predicate factors are established.
“18 U.S. Code § 1111 – Murder
(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder perpetrated by poison, lying in wait, or any other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing; or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, or robbery; or perpetrated as part of a pattern or practice of assault or torture against a child or children; or perpetrated from a premeditated design unlawfully and maliciously to effect the death of any human being other than him who is killed, is murder in the first degree.
Any other murder is murder in the second degree.
(b) Within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, Whoever is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for life;”
Here, there are jurisdictional limitations under subsection (b), and it is not clear if it can be used in connection with another criminal offense like those below:
“18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.”
The proof problems and the likelihood of years of federal appeals should lead to a deference to Utah with strong forensic trial support from the FBI and the ATF. This partnership will lead to the best result. The problems with a federal case:
- There is support for the conclusion that Charlie Kirk’s Christian faith was the true reason for this crime given that his faith led him to take issue with “trans” ideology, if that is a thing, and Robinson was in a relationship with a transsexual and obviously hated Kirk’s statements urging trans-leaning persons to feel comfortable with their biological sex and to rethink that choice;
- However, the anti-fascist messages are politically focused and religion neutral, including the “Bella Ciao” inscription on the unfired rounds, which is a communist partisan anthem used in WWII by anti-Mussolini fighters and carried forward as an anti-capitalist song of the “oppressed.” The Red Army Choir apparently sings a version of it;
- There is presently no evidence of a conspiracy; however, if one is proved, the death sentence can be sought, as Kirk was killed for expressing constitutionally protected speech in a peaceful forum;
- Utah Valley University is situated on state-owned land and is not a federal enclave, and Robinson did not cross state lines to commit the crime.
CONCLUSION
The simple solution is usually the most effective. The state of Utah has the necessary tools to prosecute one of its citizens who killed, with premeditation, an influential guest on one of its campuses. Its court system is not clogged, and it has an appellate court system that has developed rock-solid jurisprudence on the issue of the death penalty and aggravated murder factors. The trial will be swift, and the penalty severe, absent any mitigating factors, which I cannot fathom exist. A federal prosecution must clear several procedural and substantive proof hurdles to move forward. Appeals are certain even before the trial. The federal law enforcement apparatus that will examine the evidence and provide critical testimony will still be utilized if Utah solely prosecutes. This partnership will be the most effective way to ensure a powerful prosecution of one of the most heinous crimes in modern American history. Keep it simple.
Mike Imprevento
September 15th, 2025
